Sorry – not sure if that's a joke. I meant that 5c. seems to be the least likely reason EA Grants is not funding the hotel, since a simple rebranding and more stringent guest screening could reduce both risks.

Because reasons:

1. The hotel doesn't have charitable status yet, so donations are not tax deductible. A few donations are conditional on being granted charitable status.

2. The project is young and, as such, it can't have a successful fundraising history. This has been reason enough to deter at least one large donor.

3. Guest output and testimonials are not ready to be released. It's clear that several donors would prefer evidence of concrete output over an estimate of the value added by living at the hotel.

4. Some EA-aligned donors have a surprisingly low tolerance to philanthropic risk.

5. EA Grants is taking a long time to review the hotel's application. There have been rumours that this is because of one or several of the following: (a.) staffing issues at CEA which have only recently been resolved; (b.) desire to perform an audit/review of the hotel. Also, to see some operational changes at the hotel before extending runway; (c.) a strategic decision to delay funding the hotel as a countermeasure against cultural dilution, or PR risk. (c.) seems unlikely.